Chris Vance has a two-part article on the Niskanen Center’s website, about his independent run for the Washington State Senate in 2022. He is a former Republican state legislator and the 2016 Republican candidate for U.S. Senate in Washington, but he switched to being an independent in 2017.
Even though he persuaded the Democratic Party not to run anyone for State Senate, 31st district, in 2022, so that he was the only opponent of the Republican incumbent, he lost, polling 43.78% of the vote in November in his two-person race.
Here is the link to the second part of his essay. It shows that the Washington top-two system is no panacea for independent candidates. He is now with the Forward Party. Unfortunately he does not discuss proportional representation, which is the only proposed reform that would really create a multi-party system in the U.S. The Forward Party continues to ignore proportional representation, and instead still advocates that parties should no longer be allowed to have nominees on the ballot, even though his election experience of 2022 rebuts that idea.
The second part of the Vance article has a link to Part One. Part One describes the 2022 race.
TOO MANY MATH MORONS TO COUNT WHO LOVE TOP N ROTTED SYSTEMS.
NOOOOO PRIMARIES
——–
ONE ELECTION DAY
PR
APPV
TOTSOP
I hate AZ.
ONE MORE DJT IMPERSONATOR ??? — INFORM THE FBI, SS, NSA, COMMIE DONKEYS IN DEVIL CITY, ETC
Mr. Vance says: “Rather than proportional representation, Great Britain has the same single member/first-past-the-post system we do, but multiple parties win seats in Parliament.”
I do know that Great Britain is made of four countries with strong identities. That can generate interest in more than two political parties. But we don’t really have *that kind* of division in the U.S.
I am also aware that their parliament has a history of forming coalition governments alongside coalition oppositions. Minor parties can be part of coalitions. We don’t have that in the U.S. I wonder why.
His argument against proportional representation is that 1) it isn’t required for there to be more than two parties with power and 2) there may be more feasible methods for a new party to grow and gain power. I don’t know.
MINORITY RULE IN UK, CANADA, INDIA, ETC. IS EVEN UNDER 25 PCT SUPER-WORSE DUE TO MULTIPLE LARGER PARTIES.
SEE SUPER- UNSTABLE ISRAEL DUE TO PR [PARTY HACK LISTS] AND FATAL SOP VIOLATIONS.
44% of the vote for an independent is not bad.
The U.S. is never getting proportional representation because neither of the two parties in power want to encourage splintering of their vote or give any power to the likes of the Libertarians, Greens, etc.
ALL FOLKS READY FOR CIVIL WAR II DUE TO D/R ANTI-DEMOCRACY MINORITY RULE GERRYMANDERS ???
1860 GERRYMANDERS >>> 750,000 DEAD IN 1861-1866 CIVIL WAR I [2011 ESTIMATE] –
MANY THOUSANDS IN SOUTH DIED OF STARVATION IN 1864-1866 DUE TO MILITARY/ECON CHAOS.
—–
NZ GOT PR AFTER SEVERAL SEVERE MINORITY RULE GERRYMANDER ELECTIONS THAT GOT MAJOR PUBLIC ATTENTION.
Mr. Vance says: “Rather than proportional representation, Great Britain has the same single member/first-past-the-post system we do, but multiple parties win seats in Parliament.”
Minor parties that win legislative seats under single member, plurality voting are usually regionally based parties, such as the Scottish National Party in the UK, and the Parti Quebecois in Canada.